Public Works Theft—

Defendant Seeks To Avoid Prosecution

By Andrew Gorosko

The former Newtown public works employee who is accused of stealing $88,832 in public funds that she collected as waste disposal fees, is seeking participation in a court program that would allow her to avoid prosecution and have her criminal felony charge dismissed, provided that she successfully completes a two-year drug abuse rehabilitation program.

 In Danbury Superior Court on May 14, Trisha Johnson of Judd Road, Southbury, appeared before Judge Thomas L. Nadeau and provided sworn testimony expressing her desire to participate in the program, which is offered to eligible first offenders as an alternative to possible incarceration.

Following Ms Johnson’s brief testimony, Judge Nadeau referred the matter to the Connecticut Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission (CADAC) for its review to determine whether Ms Johnson is eligible to participate in the program. Ms Johnson turned 23 on May 17.

After court, Assistant State’s Attorney Warren Murray said he expects that the state will formally oppose allowing Ms Johnson to participate in the CADAC program.

Ms Johnson had the option of seeking participation in either the CADAC program, or another alternative-to-incarceration program known as “accelerated rehabilitation.” The CADAC program is considered to be a stricter program for a defendant.

On April 7, Ms Johnson, who formerly worked as Newtown’s landfill administrator, entered a pro forma plea of “not guilty” to a charge of first-degree larceny in connection with her alleged embezzlement of $88,832 in public funds, in the form of cash and checks, between February 2003 and January 2004. Police charged Ms Johnson on a court warrant on March 24.

Ms Johnson, who is free on $25,000 bail, is represented by Bridgeport lawyer Eugene Riccio.

The court file on the Johnson case contains voluminous detail concerning the items that the defendant is accused of stealing from the town. The file contains an inventory of 522 checks made payable to the Town of Newtown, which police seized as evidence, as well as an inventory of bank deposit slips, vouchers, cash, and miscellaneous items.

According to the Newtown police arrest warrant application, “The combined amount of cash and checks that was stolen between February 1, 2003, and January 2004 is approximately $88,832.” Police documents list the amount of cash stolen as $34,036, and the amount of checks stolen as $54,796. Police say they have recovered $38,645 of the $54,796 in checks.

The approximately $34,000 in stolen cash reportedly has been spent. Police documents indicate Ms Johnson told them in a confession that she stole the funds to support a drug habit.

The town is now cashing the stolen checks that have been recovered.

In court on May 14, Judge Nadeau continued Ms Johnson’s case to June 22. By then, CADAC will have determined whether Ms Johnson is eligible to seek the special program, which also is known as “suspension of prosecution.”

If she is eligible to apply, a judge would set a court hearing date. The hearing would air the facts of the case and evidence would be presented. The hearing provides the victim with an opportunity to comment on Ms Johnson’s seeking the CADAC program. The victim is the Town of Newtown.

A judge would determine whether Ms Johnson has a drug dependency, whether she would benefit from participation in the CADAC program, and whether her participation in such a program would serve the interests of justice. The state’s office of adult probation supervises the program.

After court on May 14, Mr Riccio said participation in such a “diversionary” program would allow Ms Johnson to receive drug abuse rehabilitation for two years. That rehabilitation might involve some combination of institutionalization and out-patient therapy, he said.

The restitution of stolen money to the town could be a condition of participation in the CADAC program, Mr Riccio said.

 Noting that the first-degree larceny count that Ms Johnson is facing is a serious criminal charge, Mr Riccio said he is approaching the case deliberately, and taking the proceedings “one step at a time.”

“It’s a sad case,” he said.